Magnet Schools: The New Hope for Voluntary Desegregation

For much of the past few years, reflecting general concerns about
the quality of public schooling, discussions of magnet schools have
centered on their potential for providing intensive instruction in such
subjects as science and mathematics, serving as models of
effectiveness, and increasing family choice within the public
system.

But in recent weeks, settlements in cases involving Bakersfield,
Calif., and the Ohio cities of Lima and Cincinnati have once again
directed attention to these specialty schools as they were originally
conceived—as tools for desegregation.

The three negotiated settlements share one common element: They do
not require the mandatory cross-district reassignment of students,
depending instead on voluntary measures for desegregation. Chief among
those measures in each case is the establishment of specialty
schools—characterized by theme-oriented curricula and
voluntary-enrollment policies—that are intended to draw a diverse
group of students from all over the district, thus, the planners hope,
alleviating racial imbalances in neighborhood schools as well.

Despite periodic complaints (usually from principals of nonmagnets)
that magnet schools are elitist and skim off the best students, the
educational value of the magnet concept is generally accepted,
according to researchers and other observers, particularly where
planners take pains to make the specialty schools inclusive and of
service to other schools in the district. But their utility as the sole
tool for desegregation remains a matter of considerable debate.
Civil-rights activists and many scholars have long held that voluntary
measures alone cannot effect a significant degree of desegregation in
most school districts. And if "significant" is construed as meaning
approximate racial balance in every school building, there was ample
evidence to back up their position.

"Two years ago, it [voluntary desegregation] was supposed to have
been kind of a dead letter," says Mark A. Smylie, a research associate
at Vanderbilt University's Institute for Public Policy Studies and
author of a 1982 study of desegregation techniques. "There was good
consensus out there as to what works and what doesn't work."

The available research, case studies, and interviews with scholars
who have examined desegregation suggest that if the goal is approximate
racial balance in every school building in a district, voluntary
techniques alone will not succeed; researchers have identified no
district that has accomplished this. But the evidence also indicates
that magnets can be "a powerful tool," depending on a number of
factors, including the size and racial composition of the school
district, the themes and policies of the alternative schools, and such
intangibles as district leadership.

"In some situations, at least initially, I think you can get some
improvement in the desegregation picture through voluntary
techniques,'' says Eugene C. Royster, an education professor at the
University of Rochester and principal author of two 1979 studies of
magnet schools. "But in general, I would say the evidence seems to
indicate that voluntary techniques alone, without some type of
mandatory backup system, do not provide a significant degree of
desegregation."

The U.S. Justice Department, however, "continues to believe that
school systems can be desegregated by voluntary means that eliminate
racial isolation and improve education programs," according to a
statement released by Assistant Attorney General William Bradford
Reynolds at the time of the Bakersfield settlement.

The department's civil-rights division did not respond to repeated
attempts over the past two weeks to obtain, from Mr. Reynolds or his
aides, elaboration on its position and comments on research
findings.

New Hypotheses

Many scholars, while not endorsing the Justice Department's
position, are now re-examining the evidence and hypothesizing that
voluntary methods can work under a broader range of conditions than
they previously thought.

See related story on this page.

Two of the most important factors to consider, according to
researchers, are how much desegregation is enough and whether the
threat of mandatory reassignment is needed to make magnets "magnetic."
The recent settlements illustrate different approaches to these basic
questions.

The Cincinnati plan, negotiated by the National Association for the
Advancement of Colored People, calls for a districtwide reduction of
racial isolation, as measured on a scale known as the Taeuber Index; it
permits substantial variation in the racial composition of individual
schools, so long as the districtwide score remains at a specified
level. The agreement stipulates that the courts may enforce the
contract by ordering mandatory measures if the numerical goal is not
attained within seven years through voluntary transfers.

In contrast, the Bakersfield and Lima settlements, negotiated by the
Justice Department, suggest that the racial composition of each school
roughly reflect the districtwide enrollments, within a range of 15
percentage points for Lima and 20 points for Bakersfield, at the end of
three years. But the agreements do not require strict adherence to
these relatively ambitious goals, stipulating only that the districts
make good-faith efforts to reach them.

Research Findings

Although magnet schools have attracted the attention of researchers
since their inception in the mid-1960's, there have been few empirical
nationwide studies that directly address their potential for
desegregation.

The most recent and comprehensive of these was completed last fall
by James H. Lowry & Associates and Abt Associates Inc., working
under contract to the U.S. Education Department.

In examining 1,019 magnet schools in 138 urban districts nationwide,
the Lowry/Abt researchers found that 40 percent of the districts that
developed magnets for the purpose of aiding districtwide desegregation
"do have positive results."

"Complete desegregation is not generally accomplished in these
districts, but successful use of magnets has reduced the percentage of
students in racially isolated schools from an average of 60 percent to
less than 30 percent," says a report on the study. "The districts
showing the most progress in districtwide desegregation using magnets
employ a variety of methods both voluntary and involuntary, as part of
a total desegregation plan, including pairing, rezoning, two-way busing
and mandatory assignment."

The district in the Lowry/Abt study that was most successful with
magnets, the researchers found, still was unable to desegregate all its
schools. Identified fictitiously as "Foundry City" in the study, the
district is located in the Northeastern U.S. and is 47 percent black.
It relies almost totally on 21 magnets to comply with a federal
desegregation order. "Foundry City nearly succeeds in this attempt,"
the study says. "It leaves about 20 percent of its 47,757 students
racially isolated, but this is a tremendous gain relative to perhaps 60
percent isolation a decade ago."

Variations in Emphasis

The Lowry/Abt researchers selected a nationally representative
sample of 15 school districts for closer examination. Seven developed
their magnets with districtwide desegregation objectives in mind; two
placed "considerable emphasis" on magnets but also employed mandatory
desegregation techniques such as busing, pairing, and rezoning; and the
remaining six used magnets "as a smaller part of their desegregation
plan."

The study found that seven of the 15 districts attained "high levels
of systemwide desegregation." Of these, two placed a very high emphasis
on magnets as a component in their desegregation plan, two a moderate
emphasis, and three a low emphasis. These last three ranked as the most
successful in desegregating their schools. And two of them relied
mainly on mandatory desegregation methods such as busing.

The study also found that of the eight districts that attained a low
level of systemwide desegregation, four placed a high emphasis on
magnets.

Nevertheless, the study concluded that "systems can desegregate
quite comprehensively by relying heavily on magnets or by other
means."

"The best or highest desegregation level was attained in seven
systems that used a combination of tools, including magnets," the
researchers said. "In these districts, pairing, rezoning, two-way
busing, and mandatory assignments are [reinforced] in one sense and
eased by magnets in another sense."

Mandatory Measures

Those findings are generally consistent with a 1982 study conducted
by Mr. Smylie of Vanderbilt University. That analysis of enrollment
data from 49 large school districts using a variety of techniques for
desegregation found that mandatory reassignments were more likely than
voluntary measures to reduce the number of racially identifiable
minority schools (those enrolling 90 percent or more from minority
groups). In some of the districts studied, the number of racially
isolated schools actually increased under voluntary desegregation
plans.

In districts with mandatory plans, the results showed, individual
schools were also far more likely to reflect the racial composition of
the district as a whole. And, Mr. Smylie found, districts using
mandatory plans tended to maintain higher levels of desegregation over
time than did districts using voluntary techniques alone.

Research in the late 1970's, also conducted under the auspices of
Abt Associates, reached similar conclusions. According to Christine
Rossell, one of the investigators for that project, that study found
that voluntary techniques alone are relatively ineffective in
desegregating districts in which members of minority groups make up
more than 30 percent of the student population.

Ms. Rossell, a professor of political science at Boston University,
now points out, however, that her earlier work for Abt covered only the
first two years of desegregation in the 18 districts studied. She now
believes that voluntary programs may, by stemming "white flight,"
provide more stability and a greater degree of desegregation over the
long term. She has received a grant from the National Institute of
Education to test that hypothesis.

"No one has studied whether that continuation of decline [in a
district's white student population] makes voluntary plans more
competitive after eight or 10 years," she says. "No one has looked at
the long-term impact. So when they say magnets can't do it, all you can
say is, in the first couple of years they won't be as effective as a
mandatory plan."

Importance of 'Context'

A number of researchers mention "context" as one of the most
important determinants of a voluntary program's success.

"If you put it in terms of magnet schools and voluntary selection by
itself achieving full desegregation, I'm not sure," says Marsha Levine,
co-author of a paper last year on the subject for the American
Enterprise Institute. "I think there's reason to believe that magnet
schools can be successful, but I think it probably depends upon a whole
set of preconditions and history that determine whether they will be
effective in any one community."

According to Ms. Levine and others, those preconditions may be as
mundane as a school district's physical layout, with its natural and
psychological barriers, and as intangible as leadership.

Changing attitudes on the part of parents may also affect the
success of voluntary desegregation methods, says David K. Lerch, who
headed the federal government's program of grants for special
desegregation projects until 1982, when federal block grants replaced
the categorical program.

"Five years ago, I'd have said [a plan like Bakersfield's could not
work], but I think today you could do it if it's done right," says Mr.
Lerch, who is now president of the National Association of Magnet
School Development, based in Alexandria, Va. "It can work if they pick
and choose the right kind of district and programs. ... If I were in
Justice's shoes I would have made damned sure it had a chance of
working before I approved it."

"Parents are not reacting to sending their children to school with
kids of another race as much as they did," he adds. "They are more
concerned about a proper basic education than they are with race. They
are getting somewhat away from the neighborhood-school concept, and
they're more willing to transport their kids halfway across the
district if they think the program is worthwhile."

Mr. Lerch cautions, however, that inappropriate selection procedures
can prompt charges of elitism and diminish the potential of magnet
schools to aid with desegregation. "It's terribly important that you
attract kids on the basis of interest, not ability," he says.

William L. Taylor, who negotiated on behalf of the NAACP in the
Cincinnati case, says that despite his record of often insisting on
mandatory student reassignments, "I have always believed that magnets
or alternative schools can work in a context where there is an overall
policy of desegregation. Students will make desegregative choices if
they know that whatever they do, they are likely to be in a
desegregated setting. On the other hand, if you tell parents they have
a choice between segregation and desegregation, fear will take over and
many will opt for neighborhood schools. There has to be a bottom
line."

Highly Popular Option

Magnet schools came into being because they were viewed as a way of
blunting community opposition to desegregation, those who have studied
their development say. They have flourished, despite the cutoff two
years ago of federal funds, because they have proven highly popular
with parents—so much so that the term "magnet school" in many
communities has lost any racial connotations and has come to mean any
alternative school, whether or not it was established with
desegregation in mind.

Parents in many communities seem to assume, Ms. Rossell says, that
magnet schools are "better" than others, and there is some evidence
that their students do score higher on standardized tests. But the
differences and the reasons for them have not been quantified with any
precision, and at this point assessments of magnet schools' educational
effectiveness have become reminiscent of the debate over the relative
merits of public and private schools.

In many respects, say Mr. Smylie and others, magnets share the
characteristics identified in "effective-schools" research: They tend
to have strong leadership, a cohesive curriculum, high expectations,
and consensus among faculty, students, and parents as to their goals.
These attributes, together with self-selection, or the commitment that
is implicit on the part of families who bother to seek out the schools,
should make for academic success, researchers say.

In their paper last year for the American Enterprise Institute, Ms.
Levine and Denis P. Doyle ventured that "effective magnet schools
provide quality education to average as well as above-average students.
Indeed, they do more for average than above-average students."

The Lowry/Abt study found that, of 32 magnets reporting their
student-achievement scores, 80 percent had average scores that exceeded
those of their districts. The researchers added, however, that the
selective admissions policies of some magnets influenced these
results.

Mr. Royster, of the University of Rochester, says there may also be
evidence that youngsters in some kinds of magnets do worse than average
for their districts. "I don't think you can say categorically that
there's a magnet-school effect," he says. "Intuitively, I'd have to say
that the self-selection and motivation are very, very important."

Cost Factors

If magnet schools have social and educational benefits, they also
have their costs. According to studies and interviews, they are more
expensive to run than regular schools (although the cost per pupil
declines over time), and probably costlier than running a school system
under a mandatory busing plan.

In 1980-81, according to the Lowry/Abt study, the average total cost
per student for magnet schools was approximately $200 more than for
nonmagnets; the incremental cost declined to $59 in 1981-82. For
secondary schools alone, the incremental cost per student declined from
$850 to $200 over the same period, with $100 allocable to
transportation.

Part of the extra cost is attributed to one-time expenditures for
curriculum development, equipment, planning, and building renovation.
The rest reflects higher costs for transportation and staff salaries
(both because many magnets have smaller classes and because they often
attract senior teachers who earn higher-than-average salaries).

From 1978 to 1981, the federal government, through the Emergency
School Assistance Act's special-projects grants, earmarked funds to
help defray the costs of magnets—about $125 million to $130 million
over the life of the program; many school districts also used funds
obtained under the larger ESAA basic program to support magnet schools,
but the amount has never been determined.

Federal Funds Lost

When the Education Consolidation and Improvement Act was passed in
1981, eliminating ESAA along with about 30 other categorical programs,
some observers predicted the end of magnet schools. As a result of the
consolidation, many desegregating districts lost 90 percent or more of
their federal funds.

In Milwaukee, "Magnets have to share the burden of reductions; class
sizes are up," says David A. Bennett, deputy superintendent. In
Montclair, recalls Judith H. Wilcox, the district's acting assistant
superintendent for instruction, "We had to cut back on certain
electives or put off some plans."

Nonetheless, magnets appear to have become so institutionalized and
so popular that school boards have found the money to keep them going.
The Lowry/Abt study found that many districts had to trim or otherwise
modify their optional programs when they lost the federal funds. But,
the report adds, "Only a few magnet schools have completely disappeared
due to the loss of ESAA support, ... and more districts have developed
magnets without federal support than received federal grants the last
year of funding." (See chart on this page.)

The House approved a $100-million ESAA reauthorization bill last
June. A similar bill, which would be attached as a rider to the highly
popular mathematics-and-science improvement measure, has languished in
the Senate since early last summer. Earlier this month, the chairman of
the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee approached the
supporters of the ESAA bill with a compromise that would provide urban
school districts that lost money as a result of the program's
elimination with $50 million in fiscal 1985. They reportedly have
rejected his offer because it contains no mention of school
desegregation.

Others, including the authors of the Lowry/Abt report and Ms. Levine
and Mr. Doyle of the American Enterprise Institute, have urged that the
government resume its support for magnet schools. The arguments range
from what some observers believe is inconsistent policy on the part of
the Reagan Administration—emphasizing costly voluntary approaches to
desegregation without providing any financial support—to the
contention that magnets can provide incubators for innovative
practices, to the ultimate benefit of all students.

"The federal government is supposed to be ripe for supporting
excellence and voluntary programs," says Mr. Royster.

"If the incremental cost is 100 bucks per pupil, is that too much to
bring about something exciting in education?"